Switzerland’s Minaret War (Updated)

Swiss voters go to the polls on November 29 to decide the fate of a referendum to ban the construction of minarets, the tower-like structures on mosques that are often used to call Muslims to prayer. The initiative is being promoted by the conservative Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which argues that a minaret is a symbol of Islamic intolerance.

The SVP, which also happens to be one of the strongest political parties in Switzerland, says the minaret is really an emblem of war. It describes the minaret as a “symbol of a religious-political claim to power and dominance which threatens — in the name of alleged freedom of religion — the constitutional rights of others.”

To support its position, the SVP cites a famous remark by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who once implied that the construction of mosques and minarets is part of a strategy for the Islamization of Europe. The pro-Islamic Erdogan said: “The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks and the faithful our army.”

The SVP gathered more than the 100,000 signatures needed to call a vote. A recent poll conducted by the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation shows that 34 percent of Swiss voters support the ban, while 53 percent oppose it; another 13 percent remain undecided.

The current controversy dates back to 2005, when the Turkish cultural association in Wangen bei Olten, a small town of some 4,500 people in northern Switzerland, applied for a permit to erect a 6-meter (20 feet) high minaret on the roof of its Islamic community center. The project to build the minaret, which was opposed by the majority of local residents, was roundly rejected by the town’s building and planning commission. But the Turkish cultural association appealed the decision, claiming that the local building authorities were motivated by religious bias. The case eventually made its way to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, which in 2007 ruled that the project could proceed apace. The minaret was finally erected in July 2009.

Up until recently, Muslims living in Switzerland had mostly been keeping a low profile, preferring to practice their religion discretely in nondescript mosques. But over the past several years the number of mosques has mushroomed; there now are some 200 mosques and up to 1,000 prayer rooms dotted around the country. And although only four of those have minarets (plans to build a half-dozen more minarets are currently pending approval), observers say the minarets symbolize the growing self-confidence of Switzerland’s Muslim community.

Indeed, the Muslim population in Switzerland has more than quintupled since 1980, and now numbers about 400,000, or roughly 5 percent of the population. Most Muslims living in Switzerland are of Turkish or Balkan origin, with a small minority from the Arab world. Many of them are second and third generation immigrants who are now firmly establishing themselves in Switzerland.

The new Muslim demographic reality is raising tensions across large parts of Swiss society, especially as conservative Muslims become more assertive in their demands for greater recognition of their faith.

In one case, for example, Muslim parents recently won a lawsuit demanding that they be allowed to dress their children in full-body bathing suits dubbed “burkinis” during co-ed swimming lessons. In another case, a group of Swiss supermarkets created a stir by banning Muslim employees from wearing headscarves. And in August 2009, the Swiss basketball association told a Muslim player she could not wear a headscarf during league games.

Similar controversies over the role of Islam in European society and how to reconcile Western values with a growing immigrant population are playing themselves out with increasing frequency in towns and cities across the continent.

But the disputes over mosque- and minaret-building, which are currently raging in Austria, Britain, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, are far more polemical.

Critics fear that mosques, which are becoming an increasingly prominent feature of the European landscape, are facilitating the establishment of a completely parallel Muslim society, one that is especially welcoming to Islamic fundamentalists. Even some voices on the political left, which has viewed the construction of mosques as symbols of Europe’s post-Christian sophistication and open-mindedness, are beginning to voice concerns that their proliferation is a sign of failing integration.

But others accuse groups like the SVP of going too far. As part of its campaign, for example, the SVP published a controversial poster showing the Swiss flag with a woman in a complete face veil standing on it, surrounded by minarets that resemble missiles. Some Swiss cities refused to permit distribution of the posters on the grounds that they incited racism and hatred of Muslims, while others allowed them on freedom-of-expression grounds.

Fearful of a radicalization of Muslims at home and reprisals against Swiss interests abroad, the Swiss government has come out strongly against the minaret referendum. Swiss Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, a former member of SVP, says the ban would violate the Swiss constitution, which guarantees the freedom of belief and worship for all citizens without exception. And Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey says a “yes” vote “could make Switzerland a target for Islamic terrorism.”

Swiss businesses, many with large interests in Muslim countries, have also come out against the referendum. They are keen to avoid a boycott similar to the one that hit Denmark in 2005 following a controversy over newspaper cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad.

In the end, even if Swiss voters reject the anti-minaret referendum, the SVP will still be able to claim victory for having drawn the public’s attention to the limits of multiculturalism. Indeed, Swiss voters across the political spectrum seem to agree that Muslim immigrants need to be better assimilated and socially integrated. They are also beginning to understand that the debate about Islam in Switzerland (and Europe) is just beginning.

Soeren Kern is Senior Analyst for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

Click here to view the 46 legacy comments

Click here to hide legacy comments

46 Comments, 46 Threads

The Europeans have nobody to blame but themselves. They have fostered this stupid myth of “multiculturalism” and now they’re going to have to face their own hypocrisy if they decide to ban the minarets. If they do not support the ban, it will be one more example of the West being intimidated by and bending to the will of Muslim interlopers. Once again, the Europeans have nobody to blame but themselves for this because their birth rates are abysmal and they need cheap labor to actually do more and more of the work in their countries. So they allow more and more Muslims in to do the jobs the few natural-born Europeans who are left refuse to do. Now these same Europeans are complaining that these new immigrants are not assimilating into their culture. Well boo hoo, they should have thought of that when they decided not to have any kids anymore and pursue their hedonistic social-welfare paradises. Sucks to be a European right now, right? How’s that multiculturalism working for the French these days? Any more cars or tires being burned in the streets at night? And how are the Danish doing with their Muslims? Afraid to print anything else in your newspapers? And how are the British doing with their Pakistani immigrants? Attending any more radical mosques and blowing up any trains or buses lately? And how’s that multiculturalism working out in Spain, the reddest of red European socialist states? Oh, that’s right, they do seem to be keep discovering all of those nasty al Qaeda cells in their country, even though they go out of their way to bow and scrape to every radical Muslim they see. The Europeans are fast learning that appeasing ungrateful immigrants does not work and if they keep this up the natural-born Europeans will lash out. And if you don’t believe me, just ask the Muslims in Bosnia or Kosovo how that multiculturalism worked out for them. If the Muslims in Europe keep pushing their luck, you will see another holocaust, something the Europeans excel in. Remember, Bosnia and Kosovo only occurred in the 1990s, not that long ago. The Muslims in France, Holland, Germany, or even Spain are only one major 9/11-type attack away from a huge pogrom happening again. Muslim immigrants in Europe need to decide if they are going to blend in with their new adopted homelands, or try to destroy them. If they choose the latter, they themselves will certainly be destroyed.

Oh my God, even Switzerland is being overtaken by Islam. To me, it’s rather simple. Put a stop to it now, and take your chances on retaliation, or let it continue on until the situation is irreversible.

Islam is completely incompatible with Western enlightenment. It has no place in Western society. It is a political system and international men’s club firmly based in seventh-century thinking. Europe and America are fools for letting them into our countries as there is no such thing as “moderate” Islam.

Islam will never assimilate – to think so is pure folly. As I write I am sure that Saudi money is flowing into Switzerland to fund mosque construction. Thus, with Wahbi’s in country at some point in time the locals will find themselves surrounded by hostiles and will act as prisoners within their own countries. Stop the cancer before it metastasizes.

Yes, It will make Switzerland one of many targets since islam sees collective guilt and holds collective hate against the infidel suppressing islam.
I look for targets to be worldwide and the blame will be because of Switzerlands mineret policy.
Kinda like the world wide condemnation of the USA by gay and gay supporters over don’t ask and don’t tell.

Everyone needs to watch this video if I can get the link here I got this off of Utube
Ted
8844//http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&oi=video_result&ct=res&cd=4&ved=0CB0QtwIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DysBJ5G4m67s&ei=hWsRS_n4Io60sgPk46nmAQ&usg=AFQjCNGpaEWy70WzK0z0R9FjSobOl6F6qw&sig2=KznF4-vydimDANDLkHND7g

One of the best things aboout being an American in Europe was seeing so much history and culture preserved. EUROPEAN history: French gothic, Roman arches, Italianate domes. NOT Islamic minarets.

Preservationists should be having fits over the mere suggestion of arabic minarets… for architecturally-based reasons. Never mind the fact that these monsters want all infidels killed and/or driven out of Europe. A previous poster is right–there will be another wave of immigration. Europeans fleeing their homeland… but where will they go? America is sadly on the same PC bullcrap path as Europe… God help us all.

One thing no one has pointed out: what are the rules for building a Christian Church, a Jewish Synagogue, or some other house of worship (a Buddhist temple, perhaps) in an Arab or Muslim country? Well the Buddhists are screwed (only Christianity and Judaism are allowed at all) and the Christians and Jews have to live by a set of predatory laws that (the Muslims hope) lead to the decline of their religions. According to Sharia (most of the time) you can’t build a new Church or Synagogue at all, the old one can’t be taller than the minaret of the nearest mosque, and repairs must be held almost indefinitely in abeyance. If the building starts to fall down, the worshippers can stop going to church, or attend their local mosque and learn the truth.

This is the fascinating thing about Islam, as far as I’m concerned. No other religion (not even Christianity, really) formally has written into its doctrine that everything that the religion does, and everything its followers do, should be based on discriminating against other religions, in an attempt to force people to change sides. Muslims in the West regularly complain about discrimination because they are denied things that would never even be considered to be allowed, let alone actually be allowed, to non-Muslims in Muslim countries. In the relations between Islam and the rest of the religious world, a Muslim sees the proper order of things as a one-way street: people of other religions join his, but never ever leave, regardless of the circumstances. This is the origin of the assertion that the President is an apostate Muslim: his grandfather (his father’s father) was definitely Muslim, and children of a Muslim must be Muslim also, no exceptions. That means Obama’s father was Muslim, and so is he: there is no allowance in the Muslim religion for leaving peacefully, the penalty for apostasy (abandoning one religion for another) away from Islam is death.

Oh, and as for the architecture of Europe: true, devout Muslims, at least from the Middle East, have *absolutely no* interest in other cultures or societies. Theirs is perfect, and everyone else aspires to be like them, or they should. Egypt has a small academic group interested in the Pharaohs and ancient Egyptians, largely because they want respect from other Western countries. Ditto Iraq. Iran has a similar group, largely interested in promoting Persian culture. The Turks have some more Westernized experts interested in their culture pre-Islam. Outside of that, most Muslim countries are profoundly uninterested in what came prior to Islam, because they see those who aren’t Muslim as ignorant and unimportant. So…interest in medieval cathedrals or Renaissance palaces in Europe? The Muslims, if they ever do take over, will simply demolish them, in order to build bigger mosques.

Just wait. If this referendum is voted down, just watch as the mosques get bigger and the minarets get taller.

Mosque construction and design has nothing to do with the practice of religion but has everything to do with dominating behavior. This is why Muslims build them bigger and bigger in the first place in order to pack thousands into one place at one time. It is to overwhelm the observer and cause them to lose hope in the face of such strength. It is a parlor trick written on a grand scale. It is psychological warfare.

The new assertiveness Switzerland’s Muslim population mentioned in the piece is but the first step down the path to more extremism and radicalism. It is the first expression of a process already in progress. Just look at what has happened in England. Their Muslim population has been in place for years and is mostly from Pakistan and India which are traditionally so-called moderate Muslim areas. And yet this did not stop second, third and fourth generation Muslims from becoming radicalized. The largest mosque in Europe will be built in London and it is as pure an act of intimidation in the form of a building as can be found.

Muslims can practice their religion in any old room. I would hate to see minarets in Switzerland built taller than all the church spires in a given locale but that is what is going to happen if the referendum is defeated. If anyone complains about the size as they get bigger and bigger, the screams of discrimination will soon silence any critics. Then it will be demands to have the call to prayer screaming out over Swiss cities. But it will be too late to turn back then. Switzerland will be considered Islamic territory and all out war will be justified to subjugate the remaining European population who might rebel at that time.

Sorry, coisty (#9), nice try. It’s a question of degree AND volume. Fort Hood was a tragedy, but these isolated incidences of home-grown terrorists in the United States are not on the same scale of what you find in Europe. The Muslims in France terrorized that nation FOR WEEKS with riots that nearly shut down that nation. The British are one jihadist away from another major terrorist attack and they are constantly monitoring the radical mosques in that nation (especially the Finsbury Park Mosque which spawned so many radicals and terrorists). Holland is one major murder away from a pogrom (especially after the Theo van Gogh incident) and I don’t even want to think what the Germans will do if there is a major attack on their soil. So, do we have terrorists lurking about here in the United States? Sure we do, especially after 9/11. But, in general, the American Muslim population isn’t nearly as dangerous and as militant as the Muslim populations in Europe. The good news is that the European police forces are very effective in anti-terror operations on their own turf. But they are constantly playing defense and it’s only a matter of time before some of these European jihadists make good on their threats and unleash another major attack (as they did in Madrid and London) on European soil.

Islam is the doom of the enlightenment, age of reason, Renaissance, reformation, mass suffrage, woman’s rights, science and civil society.

From Morocco to Mindanao Muslim societies are locked in 14 centuries of dark age barbarity. In the 3rd century BC an Egyptian calculated the circumference of the globe. Egypt feed Rome and Constantinople. Today it can’t feed itself. The only thing Egypt has given the world in the last 14 centuries is the savage Marmaluk. It was the French who deciphered the hieroglyphics when Muslims could not care less.

Almost any measure would be justified in resisting Muslim influence on the societies we live in.

It is Islam against everyone, everything, everywhere that is not Islamic.

It is Dar al-Islam against Dar al-Harb. Them against us, not us against them.

THE ISLAMIC WORLD WAR – mandated by Allah & Muhammed in the Koran & Ahadith: Bukhari (8:387) – Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah

Would a vote to ban minarets cause terrorism? Please, everything is only a pretext, the fact of the matter is that Islam is at war with infidel unbelievers. The fact that we EXIST is reason enough for Islamic crazies to commit more terrorist atocities. In their disturbed minds, this is part of their war to conquer the world for Islam. But, terrorism is just a tactic – there are other tactics, constructing mosques being one of them. Muslims & their Leftist allies use political correctness to stop criticism of Islam while they infiltrate our societies. While hiding behind a bunch of BS liberal rhetoric, they promote anti-Semitism world-wide, usually (but less & less) disguised as anti-Zionism. It’s time to re-think our ideas about religious freedom – Islam should banned as the hostile totalitarian political ideology that it is.

The best way to defeat Islam is to tear down its foundation. Islam is built upon 2 massive frauds, the greatest frauds perpetrated in the annals of history:

1) Islam is a “Religion of Peace”. My post above, and the savage history of Islam over the past 1,400 years clearly destroys this myth.

2) Muhammed was a “Holy Prophet”. This is the greatest myth which needs to be smashed with the wrecking ball of truth.

Every Muslim must profess the Shahada “There is no god but Allah and Muhammed is his messenger”. Muhammed ‘revealed’ the direct, immutable, unalterable word of Allah in the Koran.

The Koran (33:21) states that Muslims have “an excellent model of conduct” in Muhammed, and he is considered “al-insan al-kamil” or “the perfect man”. Muhammed set the standard of ‘morality’ for all Muslims to follow.

But by any objective standard, Muhammed was far from being an excellent model of conduct.

The hard truth is that Muhammed was a sadistic sociopath, a murderer, a decapitator, an amputator, a torturer, a mutilator, a slaver and human trafficker, a kidnapper, a rapist and sex trafficker, a looter and a thief, a liar, a paedophile rapist, a sexual deviant, a genocidist, a self proclaimed terrorist, an evil man afflicted by unquenchable sexual lust, driven by an unquenchable thirst for power, and motivated by unending material greed.

Muhammed was perhaps one of the most vile and disgusting men in the pantheon of human history. His each and every action was antithetical to every modern human value. He was nothing more than a successful Charles Manson. Muhammed should be reviled, not revered. And like Charles Manson, Muhammed should have been incarcerated, not venerated.

Every pathology that afflicts Islam can be traced directly to the examples, teachings and mandates of Muhammed. And the Jihad we all face, on every continent, comes directly from Muhammeds examples and commands to his followers.

If we destroy these myths, we destroy the most barbaric and dangerous philoshophy threatening the free world today: Islam.

Please help in smashing the myths of Islam, especially the myth of Muhammed – the Islamists can’t stand this. Please feel free to copy, paste and distribute my bullet points. They are all backed by facts and the truth.

The European leaders and media, every one of whom is a far-left liberal, are simply beside themselves that the Swiss are refusing to commit cultural and national suicide.

How dare the Swiss object to being rapidly over-run with foreigners who despise the 1500 year old Swiss culture, and would eliminate it in an instant if their numbers allowed?

European leaders and media know that only Muslim immigrants have rights, anywhere in the world. Long time native citizens have no rights what-so-ever in their own countries. If you do not believe this, just ask any European leader or journalist.

I’m not sure if I agree with a government forcing a religious group to exclude religious symbols in their place of worship. I find Burkas and other Islamic tradition to be archaic and even oppressive, but if they willingly observe them without interfering with the liberty of others, I say let them.

I agree #7 Steven. A ban on minaret will not stop muslims who choose to be fanatics. We need an active ear inside suspicious moqsues

To be “Swiss’ I suppose, doesnt include minarets. They have their quaint churches, maybe not so attended as cherished. Many other nice things there and OK to visit. Some fine products.

If I were Muslim there I might be thinking about leaving. This sounds familiar. Switzerland is the most paranoid and xenophobic place in europe (applause all around) they are civilized about it though.

Fine ideals we have. Freedom of… Seems to me that conservatives and liberals only disagree about which basic liberty they wish to curtail. Worse, it is really about which group fits best with their own vision of reality.

So, the European international elite are having a sissy fit over Swiss rubes being ethnocentric prudes over non-traditional building designs. What else is new? Tell me, when was the last time a synagogue or church was built in xenophobic Mecca? Damascus? Teheran? Aside from episodic complaints over the usual stonings and recurring genocides, when was the last time those sophisticated worldly elites had a sissy fit over Islamic building codes in tradition bound Muslim countries? Speaking of selective toleration in travel, how far do you think a Volkswagen bus would get on the road from Casablanca to Teheran with” Jews for Jesus” posted on the sides? Actually, that bus probably wouldn’t even make it through a lot of Paris neighborhoods, formerly ground zero for secular humanism and the enlightenment. When is Michael Moore going to show up in the Sudan to film Genocide 911? Probably when Michael can blame typical Muslim bad behavior on bad boy George Bush while making millions pretending to be a socialist.

In France (Eurabia) we have no freedom of speach (the country of liberty ;))). yes we can, at the risk to be prosecuted for racism, islamophobia. When crimes are committed, it is forbidden to give the origin of the murderer (racism…).

To #6 shure, i will be in the first wave if US has not become an islamic country too.

“It’s good to finally see some Western resistance, however token, against Islamic hegemonic imperialism. We must face the fact that the West is not engaged in a “War on Terror”. The truth is that we are engaged in an “ISLAMIC WORLD WAR”.”

Thanks to OUR “realistic” foereign policy ~ no? ~

Devil’s game: how the United States helped unleash fundamentalist Islam

By Robert Dreyfuss

Book overview
The first complete account of America’s most
dangerous foreign policy miscalculation: sixty years of support for Islamic fundamentalism

Devil’s Game is the gripping story of America’s misguided efforts, stretching across decades, to dominate the strategically vital Middle East by courting and cultivating Islamic fundamentalism. Among all the books about Islam, this is the first comprehensive inquiry into the touchiest issue: How and why did the United States encourage and finance the spread of radical political Islam?

Backed by extensive archival research and interviews with dozens of policy makers and CIA, Pentagon, and foreign service officials, Robert Dreyfuss argues that this largely hidden relationship is greatly to blame for the global explosion of terrorism. He follows the trail of American collusion from support for the Muslim Brotherhood in 1950s Egypt to links with Khomeini and Afghani jihadists to cooperation with Hamas and Saudi Wahhabism. Dreyfuss also uncovers long-standing ties between radical Islamists and the leading banks of the West. The result is as tragic as it is paradoxical: originally deployed as pawns to foil nationalism and communism, extremist mullahs and ayatollahs now dominate the region, thundering against freedom of thought, science, women’s rights, secularism—and their former patron.

Wide-ranging and deeply informed, Devil’s Game reveals a history of double-dealing, cynical exploitation, and humiliating embarrassment. What emerges is a pattern that, far from furthering democracy or security, ensures a future of blunders and blowback.